(a)
(b)
(c)
(d)
(e)
(f)
(g)
(h)
Figure 8: Effect on STDP of SIC timing with respect to pairings. ((a), (b)) Impact on plasticity of a SIC occurring 0.2 ms after the first pairing instead of 0.1 s before it as previously considered in Figures 7(a), 7(b). (c) STDP curves as a function of the SIC pre/post pair delay () show how LTD could get stronger while the LTP window shrink for small-to-intermediate in correspondence with ((d), (e)) a maximum of the duration of transients above the LTD threshold. These results were obtained assuming SIC rise and decay time constants, respectively, equal to ms and ms. ((f), (h)) Peak and range of this LTD increase ultimately depend on SIC kinetics as reflected by the change of sample curves for specific (yellow curve) and spike-timing intervals (cyan and purple curves) when SIC rise and/or decay time constants were slowed down 1.5-fold (orange and blue curves, resp.). ((c), (h)) The same pairing protocol of Figures 7(c) and 7(d) was used but with a SIC frequency of 0.2 Hz and variable SIC onset and kinetics according to , and . Parameters as in Figure 7.